• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Promoting polygamy: a different approach

E

EnchantedLife

New Member
The upper class is the most capable and most intelligent class in society. If the upper class has more children than other classes, ability and intelligence in society will improve generation after generation. Accordingly, upper class men should be polygamous, and upper class women should be ashamed of opposing polygamy.

I am taking a purely secular approach to polygamy. Polygamy does not apply to the average Jack and Jill, so there is no point in promoting polygamy to the whole population. Governments are charged with keeping order in society, and when government officials suppress polygamy, they are upholding the law, and also suppressing what they perceive to be disorderly conduct, either in polygamous households, or in the hostility of anti polygamous communities. The behaviour of some secretive fundamentalist Mormon polygamous households has not helped.

Polygamy in the upper class improves society, and upper class men have a duty to be polygamous, and upper class women have a duty to accept sister wives. I suggest this should be the message.
 
I appreciate your post EL. I hope you keep finding valuable information here.

The scenario you give would be great if people followed it. However, it has been shown over and over again in cultures worldwide, the more affluent a culture or society, the smaller the families tend to be. The less economically advanced culture or society, the LARGER the families tend to be.

I would like to point out that one of the key strategies of the Muslim population worldwide is to grow numerically by growing families. Their thought is if we can't convert them, either by logic or the sword, we can outnumber them. Generally, the Muslim populations in many cultures have tended to be poor.

Something to think about.

Blessings

Doc
 
Good Grief.....so how does one define 'upper class' I did not even realise that term is still in general usage.

So some arbitrary definition of upper class gets to determined who can and who cannot be encouraged to be Polygamous? Women in relationships should suffer from some sort of social pressure to accept Polygamy for the 'good of society'??
Is anyone as concerned at putting forth this eugenic form of social engineering as a positive ideology to proffer on BF?

B
 
Hmm... the Royals of Saudi Arabia seem to have taken the idea seriously ...

As for the rest of us? Hmmm
 
I understand this post was placed as a secular idea. Forgive me, but I do not agree with it in a secular way or from a Christian standpoint.

It was determined, prior to my entering kindergarten, that I have a genius level IQ and given that I have helped run a successful business, worked in a high ranking, underpaid position for a major corporation, and went back to school, graduated with honors, while working full time, raising my children alone, and caring for my very ill fiance, to become a nurse, I would say I am very capable. In fact, I became an RN Clinical supervisor in less than 7 years of nursing because I am both very smart and very capable.

I say this not to toot my own horn, but because I am trying to prove a point... Some people may use their genius and capability to become or stay upper class, whatever that is, I assume it refers to one's monetary wealth. I, however, have chosen to use mine to help others as Christ would have done. I have traveled sometimes 1500 to 2000 miles a month, covering over 13 counties in Upstate NY, in snow, rain, traffic, and every other driving hazard to go to people's homes to help them. I have, often, not even been compensated fully for gas in my car to do this and I make an OK salary, but not enough to qualify as upper class. In fact, I have sometimes needed to work 60 to 80 hours a week to cover my patient's and staff's needs, so, since as management I get no overtime, I sometimes have made less per hour than those whom I supervise. Doing my job injured me so badly I can't work right now, so I am waiting to heal and then if possible I will do it all again. It is my calling as a human being and as a Christian.

I don't do it for the money. My children are as smart as I and are both going into helping professions, on scholarships to major colleges thankfully, so they may make no money or be upper class either. In fact, they grew up and went to school in a very upper class suburb, but as soon as they were both out of high school we moved into the city because we could no longer tolerate the fake people we had lived with for 20 years. There was a time I was a yuppy, very well off, I had everything. I found that I was not satisfied as a person.

I might add that I know many smart, capable people who are not upper class. So where exactly does that leave people like myself in the scenario??? Perhaps people like me should not even have any children??? I chose not to use my God given talents to get money and I encouraged my children to love others and not think of money first. I am not asking this as a Christian even, I am asking this as a citizen of the Earth. Really, being upper class is what helps society??? Wow!!! And yes I am sure this sounds abrupt, so sorry...honestly though I am holding back...

Jen M
 
Hmm...I think we should stick to the approach that Jesus had by calling of group of ordinary men, most of them fishermen, to change the world. Let's stick to the "ordinary" folks that are filled with His spirit to handle His business.
 
EnchantedLife said:
I am taking a purely secular approach to polygamy. Polygamy does not apply to the average Jack and Jill, so there is no point in promoting polygamy to the whole population.

Polygamy in the upper class improves society, and upper class men have a duty to be polygamous, and upper class women have a duty to accept sister wives. I suggest this should be the message.
Click to expand...


Do not agree with your logic at all.
 
I do think it is a tragedy that many wealthy highly-educated couples choose to have 0-2 children (and many Christians); whereas many dysfunctional couplings have large numbers of children. ylop
 
EnchantedLife said:
The upper class is the most capable and most intelligent class in society. If the upper class has more children than other classes, ability and intelligence in society will improve generation after generation.
Click to expand...

I find your hypothesis very flawed. What source are you basing ^^^this opinion on?
 
EnchantedLife said:
The upper class is the most capable and most intelligent class in society. If the upper class has more children than other classes, ability and intelligence in society will improve generation after generation. Accordingly, upper class men should be polygamous, and upper class women should be ashamed of opposing polygamy.

Polygamy in the upper class improves society, and upper class men have a duty to be polygamous, and upper class women have a duty to accept sister wives. I suggest this should be the message.
Click to expand...
so i guess that people have to recognize which class that they are in and respect the "rules" for that class?
good luck with your attempts to preach that sermon :D ;)
 
TITLES!!

They elevate. Or levitate.

Takes 3.5 to get me off the floor. Used to take 4, but I lost some weight. With 17.3 Titles, I can float around the room at just about eye level. VERY edifying! :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Titles? I have a few: Your Highness, your Grace, She who must be obeyed.......

Facebook tests keep telling me I am Upper class...so I guess I am allowed to breed now, perhaps I ought to look for a nice upper class man....compatibility is for the lower orders doncha know??? :twisted:
 
blugrniz4u said:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Still waiting for that million dollars ???

:lol:
Click to expand...

Always.....And all Daddy's credit cards are maxed out so I had to turn to super villainy to keep me in Prada, champers and internet access.......Super villainy requires high levels of bandwidth!

B
 
Bels,

Super-villianny? What is your super-villian name, or do we need to guess?

Doc
 
I have a shortlist;

Dr. Bels
OctoBels
Belfinger
GoldenBels
ComradeBels
MagnetoBels
LokiBels
RedskullBels
EvilexBel


Any further suggestions?

Bels the nameless
 
I like Dr. Belevil lol. Just a suggestion!! I want a super villain name for when I am posting my more abrupt messages on here so that it is some other me not the nice me!!! Anything??? hahaha that was my super villain laughing.

Jen M
 
Suppose polygamy became legal, and if social attitudes and marital legislation changed to support polygamy, I still expect that only rich men would become polygamous. I am taking a purely secular approach to polygamy. If the attitudes of women changed to in favour of polygamy, then women will be the ones to allow a man to be polygamous. If a rich man, already married, asked another woman to marry him as an additional wife, she would ask if he could support two wives. If the average Joe, already married, asked another woman to be an additional wife, she would refuse to allow him to be polygamous by asking the same question, can you afford two wives. Women would decide which men are polygamous and which are not.

This is an important point. In traditional, polygamous societies, women often cannot support themselves easily, so are not well placed to refuse polygamy. This is no longer the case, and women in rich countries need to understand that they can steer modern polygamy if they choose to do so.

I was solely concerned with changing attitudes, nothing more. Only a small minority of men are rich enough to be polygamous, which is partly why I said that polygamy is irrelevant to the average Jack and Jill. Rich men do not consider polygamy because it is illegal, because of social pressure to be monogamous, resistance from potential wives, and potentially disastrous financial consequences if a wife walks out, for whatever reason.

The social classes are just as real today as ever, and upper class people know who they are. The upper class usually manage investments, and may or may not work for a living. Look at newspapers, and you will see the different preoccupations and attitudes of the social classes, catered for by upmarket and downmarket newspapers.

Some have queried the genetic implications, and to them I suggest reversing what I originally wrote, and consider an absurd society where polygamy was illegal except for low life. Only people who had a criminal record and a record for disorderly living were allowed to be polygamous. The genetic consequences would be predictable and bad. Now reverse the argument, so that polygamy was legal, if a man could afford it, and was intelligent and emotionally stable, (as judged by potential wives), and the difference in genetic consequences is obvious. Not rocket science.
 
That was a good defense of your original post. You stayed focused and you didn't use anything inflammatory or emotional. I like that.

Though I do agree that rich men will have their pick of women (just look at Hugh Hefner - I would say he is definitely a polygamist), I don't think it would be restricted to the upper class, anyway. There are plenty of women that end up stealing other women's husbands now-a-days that don't make much money at all. They just fall in love or they get seduced or they are too young to know better ;)

I have a feeling that divorce rates might actually go up just because the women involved might suddenly decide, after the honeymoon period is over, that being the 2nd wife to such a guy sucks. There would be serial polygyny on the part of the women because nothing has really changed in society to view marriage as sacred. Now, if there were laws that also treated wives as her husband's property, then that probably wouldn't happen much. ;) Indeed, without some laws to protect the man, a discontent 2nd or 3rd wife could financially ruin the family if they had rights to divorce him.

It might actually be a bigger can of worms to make polygamy legal than to leave well enough alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top